Apparent contradiction?

Welcome to the main forum of our site. Anything and everything to do with the Vancouver Canucks is dicussed and debated here.

Moderator: Referees

nuckster
MVP
MVP
Posts: 502
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 9:35 am

Apparent contradiction?

Post by nuckster » Wed Aug 29, 2018 11:26 am

Count me as one of those as being a little confused by the messaging that Benning is providing us. He acquires 3 new FAs during the off-season (Beagle, Rousel, and Schaller), which supports his contention that they will make the Canucks harder to play against - super! (but not so super terms). Then he turns around and makes a claim that going forward it's all about developing the young players for our future. Ok. Obviously there's going to be different spins on just what that means. When it comes to providing opportunities for the new players to play in the big team's line-up, he just boxed off potential spots, and we know that he's not sending any of the new FA acquisitions to the farm, so it basically means that opportunities to crack the line-up have become very limited and we can anticipate most of the 'up-an-comers' being sent to the farm. We can probably anticipate Petterson coming in on the second line, and Juolevi as the 7th defense-man (if he has recovered enough from his surgery), and that's pretty much it.

Benning claims that if a young player plays well enough, they will make room for them in the line-up. I say 'BULL-SHIT'. It sounds good, but in actuality, there's no frikin room for them in the line-up, and he's not going to be putting a vet onto waivers as much as many of us would like to see one or two put there (i.e., Gagner, Gaunce-maybe, or Granlund, etc). In all likelihood, the opportunity to play on the big team is going to be created by injuries over the course of the year... and maybe that's how it should be? Thankfully we'll be in a position to have resources to bring up from the farm over the course of the year, and it'll make for an interesting/entertaining development for sure.

As far as I'm concerned, it's easy to see that there's holes in the messaging that Benning is providing here, and just maybe for all I know, when all is said and done, there's nothing wrong with it, even if his actions aren't necessarily congruent with what he is saying. Count me as one who will be extremely surprised (and pleased) to see Gaudette in the line-up as opposed to a scrub-vet. How do others view this?
cc oldtimer

Richardstroker69
MVP
MVP
Posts: 387
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2018 9:14 am

Re: Apparent contradiction?

Post by Richardstroker69 » Wed Aug 29, 2018 12:06 pm

He’s said vets aren’t safe from waivers in a 1040 interview. As far as development goes, I get sick of listening to media talk about no room for gaudette or Dahlen, that’s a good thing. First off Dahlen wasn’t comfortable playing in Utica last year and wanted to play in Sweden, to me that sounds like a guy you don’t want to put in a situation that’s over his head, 6 months or a year in Utica is perfect for him. Gaudette needs to be placed in an offensive type role, utica is again perfect for him to start and get lots of minutes. If joulevi doesn’t make the top 6 he’ll be playing utica as well which isn’t a bad thing. There’s gonna be trades and change in the roster as things play out, but freaking out that we’re not gifting spots to guys that might not be ready is a waste of time and effort.

nuckster
MVP
MVP
Posts: 502
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Apparent contradiction?

Post by nuckster » Wed Aug 29, 2018 12:21 pm

Richardstroker69, I'm Freaking out? :hmmm:
You made no attempt to discuss the main point, re: apparent contradiction in messaging.
cc oldtimer

User avatar
SKYO
CC Legend
Posts: 9501
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:34 pm

Re: Apparent contradiction?

Post by SKYO » Wed Aug 29, 2018 12:58 pm

The Sedins are gone, they played the majority of minutes up front including the powerplay, the signing of depth vets is to help transition in the youth so they can play in a scoring role where there was a big hole left by the twins.

A good read on the waiver status of Canucks players:
https://canucksarmy.com/2018/08/27/waiv ... um=twitter
Once Schaller is deemed healthy, the Canucks will be forced to waive or trade another player from the group who made the team out of camp.

The other thing that we need to remember is that Jim Benning has stated on the record, and vehemently I might add, that he will make room for any young player who earns a roster spot. If that is indeed the case, one would hope that if Dahlen and or Gaudette make the squad out of camp that it comes at the expense of players like Granlund or Gagner rather than Goldobin or Leipsic.

In my mind, Goldobin, Leipsic, Dahlen, Gaudette, Gaunce, Granlund, and Gagner are on the bubble up front this season.

I think that Tim Schaller was signed for a reason and I expect that he will be playing most nights once he is healthy.

It will be interesting to watch this all shake out, but one thing is for sure…everyone better bring it if they want to earn a job out of camp. Some players may earn a job, but have to wait for a trade/injury to shake out before they get their chance.

As I have mentioned in this space in the past, the Utica Comets will have their own crowded ranks to deal with as well, but depth is a good problem to have…and not one that Canucks/Comets fans have been used to.
I think Gaunce is the first casualty, and the Canucks might think a player gets injured by October, in any case at one point 5-6 regulars up front were out with injuries the past few seasons, so lets see how it all shakes out.

The fringe depth guys on the Canucks are easily moveable imo if Dahlen and Gaudette knock the socks off the coaching squad to make the team.
A long time ago, a baseball player remarked: "If I owned a ballclub, I'd hire a $5,000 coach and a $15,000 scout."

Richardstroker69
MVP
MVP
Posts: 387
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2018 9:14 am

Re: Apparent contradiction?

Post by Richardstroker69 » Wed Aug 29, 2018 1:06 pm

nuckster wrote:
Wed Aug 29, 2018 12:21 pm
Richardstroker69, I'm Freaking out? :hmmm:
You made no attempt to discuss the main point, re: apparent contradiction in messaging.
It’s not so much you but the media is pumping out this sentiment and it’s annoying. I did discuss the main point it was my first statement, Benning said he’ll waive veterans if the young guys out play them.

Ronning's Ghost
MVP
MVP
Posts: 874
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 5:25 pm
Location: New Westminster

Re: Apparent contradiction?

Post by Ronning's Ghost » Wed Aug 29, 2018 1:11 pm

Benning doesn't need me to defend him on this board full of his acolytes, but just to show that I'm at least striving towards objectivity, no, I don't think there's any contradiction. The free agents hired in the off-season are clearly meant for 4th, or maybe 3rd, line roles. The young players (and I think we're mostly talking about the forwards, here) that the organization is ostensibly trying to bring into the line-up this season are meant for offensive roles. In that case, it was important for the organization to bring in supporting role-players. I don't think anyone was expecting Pettersson, for example, to break in on the 4th line, or be effective there. If anything, the organization came up short in providing the sort of thermonuclear deterrent that I fear young Pettersson will need to have around to last the entire season.

The veteran players of limited ability and stalled development who might be in the way (Gagner, Sutter, Eriksson -- individual lists may vary) were brought in during prior off-seasons (as placeholders? -- Benning said differently, but I have no problem with him lying to the fans for the good of the team), and I think most fans are hoping that management is willing to jettison them for whatever assets might be recovered if the young players can show they are ready to step into their places.

This part of the plan, at least, looks cohesive and rational from where I'm sitting. Now the test, or part of the test, is to see whether any of the young acquisitions have what it takes to (someday) lead an NHL team to a championship -- or as some have predicted, an NHL championship dynasty.

User avatar
micky107
CC Legend
Posts: 4912
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 6:27 am

Re: Apparent contradiction?

Post by micky107 » Wed Aug 29, 2018 1:43 pm

All I'm going to say on this right now is that this particular camp has more intrigue, interest, and competition than any we have been witness to
for quite some years.
I have absolutely no reason to doubt the main principal put forth by Benning that a spot can be earned by whoever truly earns it.
If it gets complicated, it'll be dealt with.
"evolution"

ESQ
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1731
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2011 6:34 pm

Re: Apparent contradiction?

Post by ESQ » Wed Aug 29, 2018 2:01 pm

nuckster wrote:
Wed Aug 29, 2018 11:26 am
Count me as one of those as being a little confused by the messaging that Benning is providing us. He acquires 3 new FAs during the off-season (Beagle, Rousel, and Schaller), which supports his contention that they will make the Canucks harder to play against - super! (but not so super terms). Then he turns around and makes a claim that going forward it's all about developing the young players for our future. Ok. Obviously there's going to be different spins on just what that means. When it comes to providing opportunities for the new players to play in the big team's line-up, he just boxed off potential spots, and we know that he's not sending any of the new FA acquisitions to the farm, so it basically means that opportunities to crack the line-up have become very limited and we can anticipate most of the 'up-an-comers' being sent to the farm.
I guess that's your main point - that he's "boxed off" potential spots with the UFA acquisitions.

Benning is on record as saying that, contrary to your assumptions, he hasn't "boxed off" any spots. I think that is consistent with his track record over the past 3 years - he's not afraid to make trades or demotions and has let young players earn a spot on the roster. I'm pretty this same "apparent contradiction" was brought up when Horvat made the team, when Hutton/McCann/Virtanen made the team, when Tryamkin and Stecher made the team, when Boeser made the team...

Can you think of a single situation where a young player was "boxed out" of a spot that he had earned? I guess there was the 2 games at the start of last season when Boeser was in press box...

nuckster
MVP
MVP
Posts: 502
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Apparent contradiction?

Post by nuckster » Wed Aug 29, 2018 2:23 pm

Richardstroker69 wrote:
Wed Aug 29, 2018 1:06 pm
nuckster wrote:
Wed Aug 29, 2018 12:21 pm
Richardstroker69, I'm Freaking out? :hmmm:
You made no attempt to discuss the main point, re: apparent contradiction in messaging.
It’s not so much you but the media is pumping out this sentiment and it’s annoying. I did discuss the main point it was my first statement, Benning said he’ll waive veterans if the young guys out play them.
I hope he really does follow thru with waiving a vet when it's justified/needed, but based on what has been observed with Green/Benning, there's been lots of occasions where the vet was cut slack and the rookie was pulled/punished for less transgressions. When looking at this, Green's role (perspective) is an important part of the equation. Sometimes I thought Green was being overly punitive with the rookies, but I guess it's a balance (judgment call) between holding the player accountable and kicking their ass vs knowing when to cut them some slack. It just seems though that he operates with a 'vet bias' - seems to prefer his vets over the rookies, and rookies don't get cut much slack before they're benched. I digress.I'll be very surprised if Benning waives a single veteran. What he does or doesn't do is strongly influenced by Green's take of it all and his own respective biases.
cc oldtimer

User avatar
micky107
CC Legend
Posts: 4912
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 6:27 am

Re: Apparent contradiction?

Post by micky107 » Wed Aug 29, 2018 2:31 pm

OK, I said only one thing but now I feel I have to say;
Is the fair thing to do, not "reset the clock?".
At this point. Right now. Benning is on his own for the first time.
Just saying.
"evolution"

User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 17613
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: Apparent contradiction?

Post by Strangelove » Wed Aug 29, 2018 2:49 pm

Ronning's Ghost wrote:
Wed Aug 29, 2018 1:11 pm
I don't think there's any contradiction. The free agents hired in the off-season are clearly meant for 4th, or maybe 3rd, line roles. The young players (and I think we're mostly talking about the forwards, here) that the organization is ostensibly trying to bring into the line-up this season are meant for offensive roles. In that case, it was important for the organization to bring in supporting role-players. I don't think anyone was expecting Pettersson, for example, to break in on the 4th line, or be effective there.

The veteran players of limited ability and stalled development who might be in the way (Gagner, Sutter, Eriksson -- individual lists may vary) were brought in during prior off-seasons... and I think most fans are hoping that management is willing to jettison them for whatever assets might be recovered if the young players can show they are ready to step into their places.

This part of the plan, at least, looks cohesive and rational from where I'm sitting.
Image
____
GO CANUCKS GO!!!

Ronning's Ghost
MVP
MVP
Posts: 874
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 5:25 pm
Location: New Westminster

Re: Apparent contradiction?

Post by Ronning's Ghost » Wed Aug 29, 2018 2:50 pm

micky107 wrote:
Wed Aug 29, 2018 2:31 pm
Benning is on his own for the first time.
It would likely be a better situation for Canucks fans if Benning truly were on his own, but I believe this board was coming to a consensus that the Little Eagles are on the more interventionist side of the range of NHL ownership styles, and that none of their hockey operations input has been helpful.

Ronning's Ghost
MVP
MVP
Posts: 874
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 5:25 pm
Location: New Westminster

Re: Apparent contradiction?

Post by Ronning's Ghost » Wed Aug 29, 2018 2:59 pm

Strangelove wrote:
Wed Aug 29, 2018 2:49 pm
Image
I'm happy that I was able to articulate the rationale behind the off-season plan to your satisfaction, but I believe the word for which you were searching was "redacted". (Hey, that's kind of meta :D )

Richardstroker69
MVP
MVP
Posts: 387
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2018 9:14 am

Re: Apparent contradiction?

Post by Richardstroker69 » Wed Aug 29, 2018 4:28 pm

nuckster wrote:
Wed Aug 29, 2018 2:23 pm
Richardstroker69 wrote:
Wed Aug 29, 2018 1:06 pm
nuckster wrote:
Wed Aug 29, 2018 12:21 pm
Richardstroker69, I'm Freaking out? :hmmm:
You made no attempt to discuss the main point, re: apparent contradiction in messaging.
It’s not so much you but the media is pumping out this sentiment and it’s annoying. I did discuss the main point it was my first statement, Benning said he’ll waive veterans if the young guys out play them.
I hope he really does follow thru with waiving a vet when it's justified/needed, but based on what has been observed with Green/Benning, there's been lots of occasions where the vet was cut slack and the rookie was pulled/punished for less transgressions. When looking at this, Green's role (perspective) is an important part of the equation. Sometimes I thought Green was being overly punitive with the rookies, but I guess it's a balance (judgment call) between holding the player accountable and kicking their ass vs knowing when to cut them some slack. It just seems though that he operates with a 'vet bias' - seems to prefer his vets over the rookies, and rookies don't get cut much slack before they're benched. I digress.I'll be very surprised if Benning waives a single veteran. What he does or doesn't do is strongly influenced by Green's take of it all and his own respective biases.
What’s the worst case scenario? He doesn’t waive any vetersams and we lose goldobin, Granlund, or gaunce on waivers? In the big scheme of things that’s nothing. Making sure gaudette, Dahlen, Lind, gadjovich, joulevi, can step into the league and play with confidence is way more important. Fans and the media don’t get to see the inner workings, confidence is huge for hockey players, some guys (like a Quinn Hughes) have lots and can make that jump seamlessly others not so much.

User avatar
Hockey Widow
CC Legend
Posts: 13378
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 8:52 pm

Re: Apparent contradiction?

Post by Hockey Widow » Wed Aug 29, 2018 6:28 pm

Well one has to understand what he means by younger players. Does it mean just Dahlen, Gaudette and Pettersson or does he include Virtanen, Goldobin, Leipzig, Stetcher, Horvat, Boeser, Hutton?

They are young players too compared to Sutter, Erickson, Edler, Tanev.

With the twins gone there will be more top six ice and PP time to share with the not so young youngsters. I think he includes those players in his analysis, not just the newbies.
The only HW the Canucks need

Post Reply